logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.11.13 2015가단11818
사해행위취소
Text

1. As to shares of 2/13 of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. On February 5, 2014, between the Defendant and Nonparty B.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 19, 2006, Korea Exchange Bank, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the Defendant’s ASEAN with Jeonju District Court Kim Jong-si, 2006Gau12604, and sentenced on December 19, 2006, that “B shall pay to Korea Exchange Bank 10,163,928 won and 9,348,82 won with 24% interest per annum from September 29, 2006 to the day of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. The above claims against B were transferred in sequence to the Plaintiff on Nov. 28, 2008 by each assignment contract, and each of the above claims assignment claims was notified to B on Nov. 28, 2008, to the Korea Asset Management Loan Co., Ltd. on Apr. 14, 2010, and to the Plaintiff on Nov. 28, 201.

C. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) is owned by the Defendant’s husband C. C died on February 5, 2014, and C’s heir was D, E, B, F, and G, the Defendant and his/her child.

On February 5, 2014, the deceased C’s inheritors entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property with the content that the Defendant would own each of the instant real estate, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership based on inheritance pursuant to the above agreement on division of inherited property by the Jeonju District Court Kim Jong-dong Office on June 23, 2014 as the receipt on June 23, 2014.

E. At the time of the above agreement on the division of inherited property B, B did not possess any property other than the inheritance shares of each of the instant real estate, and was in excess of the debt.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the above agreement of division of inherited property agreement is a false declaration of intent made by the agreement between the defendant and the non-party B in order to avoid the creditor's compulsory execution. However, the plaintiff argues that the above agreement is a false declaration of intention.

arrow